Talk:Riven/@comment-33536623-20140127122040/@comment-9008617-20140131061225
"I won't address your silly provocation which really doesn't fit your elaborate posts." - Mege Umm, sorry... but what provocation are you talking about? Fact: You derailed and got an entire thread about Riven's shield CD removed because you went completely offtopic and outright flamed me because you "didn't appreciate" my "attitude" because I came off as arrogant and "pompous". Fact: You re-engage in this thread with some trite remark that you agree with Leyrann (no surprise there) that I don't know my Riven which is frankly irrelevant. You go so far as to try to imply that "well thought out and written" posts are just theorycrafting and therefore somehow less meaningful than anecdotal evidence. When I call you out on that you completely ignore rebuttling. "First of all, level one all in are pointless to address. Minion aggro is way too damaging at that point and neither side usually tries such a risky move. Garen gets aggressive by level 4, while Riven does so one or 2 level earlier." - Mege Of course you'd say it's pointless to address if your champ Garen is weaker at level 1. At level 4 Garen will usually have 1 rank in silence, 1 rank in W (24 sec CD, have fun with that), and 2 ranks in spin. At level 3 Riven will have all of her base skills granting her mobility, 2 hard CCs, 2 damage spells, a shield, and skills to trigger her passive. I honestly have no idea where you're pulling your facts from besides just saying it. No wonder you prefer anecdotal evidence over actual facts. "You're also diminishing the regen importance by saying Garen being left alone is situational while it really is not, a good Garen can get that regen up safely and the only way for Riven to stop this is getting in his minions dangerous zone." - Mege They're both melee champions... If Garen stays near creeps to exchange blows he's not going to be able to proc that precious passive of his and everytime he takes a hit it's going to reset the timer. "However, Garen's ult can't be dodged/baited with a well timed flash, Yasuo's wall, or some sort of dashing ability. I do obviously agree Riven's ult is stronger in teamfights though." - Mege Except that Garen's ult requires he be within 400 range and Riven's ult is 900 range (i.e. more than double) and covers up nearly the width of a lane... 400 range is less than pretty much all ADCs and so if you can escape an ADC from last hit AA'ing you then you can escape Garen's ult even easier. Geez, Garen won't technically "miss" his ult but it's just as useless if he can't use it. Hexdrinker/MoM (which some Rivens are suggested to build vs AP heavy teams) also significantly counters Garen's ult. "Why are you comparing Garen's E damage at level 18 with Riven's Q damage at level 1 anyway?" - Mege Because I didn't...? My calculations were only included base armor values while ignoring armor runes and items in order to give the best case scenario for a tanky Garen's rank 5 spin. Although I suppose a more accurate calculation would've been at lvl 9 or 10 at which point Garen typically gets rank 5 in spin. This means about 24 less base armor on average. In any case, the point still remains that a "heath/armor tank" Garen won't be doing "considerable damage" as you claimed which I thought was common knowledge. "Tyr and calculate how much damage Riven deals at level 4 or 5, considering AD Quintessences and Marks, Def Seals, with a doran's blade and a pickaxe (or a vampiric scepter, whatever) against a level 4 or 5 Garen with AD Quintessences and Marks, and Def seals, with a doran's shield and a chain vest, with his W active." - Mege Why? So you can ignore it? But seriously, you're free to run the numbers yourself. Just note that Garen's W has a huge CD of 24 seconds and lasts only 2 seconds... Remember to factor in the different scenarios (i.e. who's engaging who, Garen W's before or after the spin, Riven stuns before or after Garen's W, etc etc). "Oh look, we're examining complex scenarios simply using numbers (and we're not even factoring minions damage and masteries, nor lane freezing and gank safety, and don't let me get started on crits!). Don't you think it's something which can't be analyzed simply by calculations?" - Mege We're examining complex scenarios? Minions have masteries? XD Lane Freezing: Both Garen and Riven are AoE pushers although you should be using AAs to last hit. If you want to get into the nitty gritty you could calculate the damage that's done to minions during these skirmishes but I suspect Garen ends up pushing harder simply because his main damage is from his spin which can be cancelled but unlikely to happen during engages whereas Riven can reposition where her Qs will land. Gank Safety: Riven is higher mobility and provides 2 hard CCs and a shield to absorb ignite/damages. Garen's Q removes slows (note Riven doesn't slow) and grants him 35% extra movement speed for 1.5 seconds and Garen's W has a huge 24 sec CD and only reduces CC by 30%. Even if you were to say that Garen and Riven were equally safe from ganks, if I was a jungler I would want to gank for Riven more so than for Garen since Garen lacks slows or hard CCs. Crits have a crit % chance of occuring and a dmg % modifier... all of which are very calculable. Just because the math seems hard to you doesn't mean it's not do-able and that we should resort to storytelling anecdotes. "Also, since you've posted a lot about engagment mechanics think for a moment, Garen engages with Q, Riven is silenced for 1.5 seconds, meanwhile Garen starts spinning right after, and Riven autoattacks once, or maybe twice. After 1.5 seconds Riven can use her Q to properly trade, but Garen's only has to spin for 1.5 more seconds (actually, considering the last 0.5 seconds of his E deal no damage he only needs one more second for the full damage) and then he's likely running away. Do you really think Riven can Q -> AA -> Q -> AA -> Q -> AA in 1 second? Garen will also wait for this timeframe to activate his W (which lasts 2 seconds at rank 1) and reduce the incoming damage. Even if Riven somewhat managed to land all of her Q + AA (not that easy without a phage on a fleeing target but she does have her W and Q knock up after all) Garen will, as stated above, just regen in his safe zone and be ready to trade back again in a relatively small time frame." - Mege That's a cute story. ^_^ So Garen burns his Q which gives him his 35% bonus movement speed for 1.5 seconds and which btw requires Garen landing an AA in the first place, beats the crap out of Riven, and still manages to run away? Meanwhile this Riven in your scenario still has all her skills off CD... as in the same Riven who can has 3 Qs and 1 E for gap closing and 1 knock up and 1 stun. Well, golly gee whiz, I'm sure happy that the spin can be cancelled in the last 0.5 seconds. =P Also I wouldn't call 24 seconds a "relatively small time frame". When Riven can spam 6 shields in a minute to mitigate 100+ damage each time while Garen can only push out 2 damage reduction buffs in that same minute. Riven's shield means that the damage doesn't even touch her actual health whereas Garen's damage reduction always effects his healthbar. "No, this isn't about interpretating something. To counter a pick/ counter a champion is always referred to laning phase or mid game laning because during lategame/teamfights there is too many variables and sinergies going on such as peeling and CC focusing (actually the jungler variable itself usally invalidates lane countering too)." - Mege I like how you say there's no dispute to what "countering" means yet in the very next line you say it's referring to laning phase OR mid game laning.... Ah. Priceless. It's all about the context which is still something you fail to grasp it seems. A lot of champs aren't just straight counters from level 1 to 18. Many champs have different power spikes throughout the game. A solid counter pick for level 1-6 may be weak in mid game and fall off completely to a utility champ in late game. "Oh how ironic. This ( http://www.lolking.net/charts?region=all&type=top-matchup&range=daily&map=sr&queue=normal ) is scientific evidence, backed up by numbers and large scale statistics over all levels of play." - Mege First of all, cool chart. :) Second of all, it's not across all levels of play as you claimed. No one plays Garen above Platinum in Ranked Solo or Teams. At Platinum elo, out of 13 993 games played this month, Garen won 50.11% of the time which means Garen was on the winning team 30 games more out of 13,993 games. I would hardly consider a difference of 30 games out of nearly 14,000 games to be hard set evidence that Garen counters Riven especially since Riven was reworked/changed recently. Garen's winning % increases as you go down in elo/skill level to a maximum of 52.32% in Bronze. This is more than likely due to the lower skill floor and the lower skilled players found in bronze elo. In any case, take from it what you will. I use numbers to back up the mechanics behind Riven vs Garen and you used the number of games that they were on the winning team. Ever heard of the saying "Correlation doesn't imply causation "? If this was a 1v1 game I might consider conceding but wait... it's not. Now feel free to provide your calculations and assume everything always goes exactly as your maths (funnily enough, this could be considered anecdotal evidence) while in reality it doesn't." - Mege You really still don't grasp what anecdotal evidence is, do you? "Also, feel free to keep implying we're all poor ignorants,..." - Mege I'm not implying you're uh.. "poor ignorants"... What bothers me is that you turn a blind eye to the numbers behind the game and hold storytelling in the same regards as actual facts and math. "...your numbersOBVIOUSLY provide greater evidence than a real experience of over 2 years with this champion." - Mege You could have been playing League since beta testing but it still wouldn't mean you're more credible or more skilled than everyone else. Geez. That should be common sense man. "Oh and I guess someone should go and tell those players (nearly 100.000 games monthly) that you're right and their percentages are just anecdotal evidence! I'm sure your ONE MAN calculations are way more accurate than their 95000 games!" - Mege You ever hear the saying that "anything goes in bronze"? Winrate is based off which team took out the other team's nexus - not who won their lane. The higher you climb in the elo level, the less Garen wins. According to your chart, Garen stops being used above Plat whereas Riven is still played up to Challenger. You're a smart cookie, so can you tell me why if Garen is such a hard counter to Riven that in the last 30 days not a single Diamond and Challenger player picked Garen against the 100,000 games played top by Riven? "Or maybe you know, just MAYBE you might be...wrong?" - Mege Maybe but I haven't been proven wrong by your pointless ranting so far... i'm sorry? "And in case you didn't notice, THIS is taking a shot at you, since trying to be polite only resulted in you victimizing yourself while poking at me." - Mege No, you've been flaming me ever since your first post directed at me. You even stated that it was because you didn't like my "pompous know-it-all attitude" which is why you started flaming me and got the other thread removed. I find this ironic because I don't like Leyrann's attitude and anecdotal posts as facts but at least I don't outright flame them. If Leyrann posts something I don't agree with I explain why and add to the conversation. You've been doing nothing but going after me since the start. I would hardly call it self-victimisation if I'm only reporting the truth and not only that but I've sat here and entertained all your points. Point. by. point. "EDIT: On an offtopic note I JUST NOTICED, not only were you the only one to get a warning in the deleted thread but you also went up to the moderator and asked him to warn me and CliffShadow as well! This definitley marked my deadline in trying to have a discussion of any sort with you. Have a good day." - Mege Thanks for stalking my wikia page? I only presented my side of the story. It felt unfair that somehow I got sacked for inflammatory reasons yet it was both you and Cliff continually going offtopic to flame me. One of the reasons being that I had contributed the most in terms of quantity of posts and therefore the mods thought/felt I was the one inciting flamatory posting which I honestly disagreed with since quantity of posting isn't reflective of the actual infraction or what precipitated the action. Quantity is what happens when you respond back to two flamers... In any case, it's up to to the forum mods and their intentions were good. I just felt like they warned the wrong person as evident by your continual flamey nature... I already warned you not to derail this thread and yet here we are again.